suppose we let civilization begin

8/6/2019 Suppose We Let Civilization Begin

1/130


2/130

SUPPOSE WELET

CIVILIZATION

BEGIN

by

Richard W. Wetherill

Copyright 1978, 1979, 1991

by

Humanetics Fellowship

Royersford, PA 19468

All Rights Reserved


3/130

People are told that our various wars were fought to

make the world safe for democracy. But unsafe conditionsstill prevail. Individuals and groups keep seizing unfair ad-

vantages to the detriment of others who keep trying to fight

back by doing the same thing.

Subtle, unobserved dishonesty is involved.

Such dishonesty is the natural consequence of reason-

ing from urges based on personal motives. The remedy is to

reason from reality: fill the need of the situation.

Everybody wants to be a winner. So advantage taking is

popularbut also dangerous. In fact, it is a prevalent way

of fighting.

Urges make people pit themselves against one another.

Reality does not.

Members of the humanetics research group learned to

drop their urges and reason from reality. They enjoy a pro-

ductive, civilized way of lifeone that dramatically suc-ceeds. In their varied activities, they have eliminated an

astonishing variety of those problems that destroy peoples

happiness.

They see that dropping urges is the means whereby

civilization truly can begin.

ii


4/130

ContentsPREFACE TO PART I.......................................................................1

PART I ............................................................................................2

THE BASIC FLAW........................................................................2UNREASONING INTERFERENCE ...................................................3HIDDEN MOTIVES .......................................................................4POWER OF MOTIVES ................................................................... 6CONTROL BY MOTIVES ............................................................... 7ORDINARY HONESTY.................................................................. 9HIDDEN DANGER ......................................................................10INHERITED MISTAKES............................................................... 11CAUSE OF THE FLAW ................................................................ 13THE SERIOUS THREAT .............................................................. 14SYSTEMS OF REASONING ..........................................................16

THE SUBTLE TRAP ....................................................................17PREFACE TO PART II ................................................................... 20

PART II .........................................................................................21

THE BASIC LAW .......................................................................21UNREFUTED EVIDENCE............................................................. 22UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES.........................................................24COUNTERFEIT PRINCIPLES ........................................................26

IRRATIONALITY ........................................................................28GENUINE PRINCIPLES ............................................................... 30RATIONALITY ...........................................................................31LIFE WITHOUT FEAR ................................................................ 33UNSCIENTIFIC THINKING ..........................................................35SCIENTIFIC THINKING ............................................................... 36INTELLIGENCE ..........................................................................38

iii


5/130

iv

PREFACE TO PART III.................................................................. 41

PART III ....................................................................................... 42

THE BASIC PLAN ......................................................................42ESCAPE FROM TROUBLE ...........................................................43SUPPOSITIONAL REASONING.....................................................45THE DANGER OF BELIEVING.....................................................47WHAT CONSTITUTES PROOF.....................................................48THE LOGIC OF REALITY............................................................50ACCESSIBILITY OF INFORMATION ............................................. 53ADOPTION OF HONESTY ...........................................................54OBVIOUS EVIDENCE ................................................................. 56THE ASTONISHING RELEASE.....................................................58

CONCLUSION................................................................................62

EVIDENCE OF THINGS NOT SEEN .............................................. 62

ADVENTURESINHUMANETICS ......................................... 65

INTRODUCTION TO EXPERIENTIAL MATERIAL .......................... 65STOPPING FAMILY FIGHTS........................................................67THE DEVIL MADE ME DO IT.....................................................89RELATIONSHIPS ........................................................................91GAMES ................................................................................... 118


6/130

Preface to Part I

By applying what is said in this section, the members of

a group of young people stopped their involvement in typi-

cal teenage trouble over smoking, drinking, drugs, and sex.

The changes came one by one, but each change was sudden

and effortless and proved to be lasting.

Preteen children also reduced their misbehavior suffi-

ciently that they no longer needed scoldings or punish-

ments. Instead, calling their attention to misbehavior

proved sufficient to end it because the kids themselves had

determined that they should behave themselves in a civi-

lized manner.

Parents and school authorities were delighted.

Numerous adults adopted and applied the same infor-

mation in their vocational and private lives and ended theirarguments. Anyone who thoughtfully and honestly consid-

ers all the details presently is able to understand why.

At first some of the information may seem too good to

be truebut that condition passes as soon as the informa-

tion is fully and correctly understood.

1


7/130

Part I

The Basic Flaw

A very simple flaw has kept people locked in multitu-

dinous kinds of trouble. That flaw is causing conflicts, ac-

cidents, sicknesses, compulsions, bad habits, personalityfaults of all kinds.

It is causing people to lose their livesto kill them-

selves and each otherneedlessly.

It is a flaw of thinking, a flaw expressed in conversa-

tion, a flaw that causes irrational behavior. It is a congenital

flaw, a flaw with which everyone is afflicted. It is a flaw

that is reinforced by the thinking and behavior of parents,older brothers and sisters, teachers, clergymen, people in

every category of life without their awareness.

The reason this presentation is deemed practical at the

present time is that a modest number of persons have dem-

onstrated that they have achieved a reasonably clear, cor-

rect understanding of the flaw. They have made substantial

progress toward counteracting and eliminating its influ-ence. As a consequence, some very great improvements

have developed in their lives. Improvements are still devel-

oping.

People of mature years, young people, even small chil-

dren have produced the evidence. As a spectacular exam-

ple, those children have made it clear that recognizing and

giving attention to that flaw makes every kind of discipli-

nary action unnecessary. Instead of the former disciplinary

action, the kids call each others attention to behavior that

is not satisfactory. They refuse to support each others

2


8/130

wrong behavior, want no support for their own, and accept

suggestions with good grace.

Unreasoning Interference

More than fifty years of careful research were needed to

surmount initial resistance to information about the flaw,

because the flaw itself tended to cause numerous misunder-

standings.Because of it, the information was hotly resented, lied

about, discredited, evaded, counteracted, and contradicted

by almost everybody. Very few wanted to hear one word

about it. Oddly, the most vigorous opposition came from

those precise persons who had the greatest obligation to

study closely and carefully the information that described

the flaw. Had they done so, many years of confusion, trou-ble and turmoil could have been avoided to societys last-

ing benefit.

It is not known whether the influential persons in the

fields of education, government, industry, commerce, relig-

ion, family life, and elsewhere are ready to look with hon-

estywhich is all it takesat a description of the flaw. But

those persons who are willing to look with honesty at thatdescription will find it extremely helpful. They can achieve

the kind of lives they have always wanted but have never

been able to achieve.

They can replace turmoil, conflict, struggle, and various

disastrous results that have developed in their lives with life

as it should beas it demonstrably is for those persons

who clearly and correctly understand the flaw.

Most persons can easily observe that a child is born

with the inclination to get his own way. He takes what he

wants with no concern for who owns it. In later life that is

3


9/130

regarded as dishonest, but the infant is presumed innocent,

and his action is commonly overlooked.At a certain stage, a person wants to be known as a law-

abiding citizen and may scrupulously try to avoid taking

anything that does not belong to him. But a small child

goes through stages in which he unhesitatingly takes what-

ever he wants just because he keeps trying to get his own

way.

As a child grows older, in all probability, he may go

through a pilfering stage in which he steals money from his

mothers purse or at least cookies from the pantry, fruit

from the refrigerator, even candy or cigarettes from a store.

Hidden Motives

Children are easily excused for dishonest behaviorlargely because parents remember what they did at a simi-

lar age. But a part of the process of achieving such degrees

of civilization as exist have been achieved by the develop-

ment of some understanding of the concept that stealing is

wrong.

Relatively little has been accomplished by that under-

standing. It is immediately obvious that a society that re-quires laws and penalties against stealing must be a dishon-

est society.

Ours is a dishonest society. Ours is such an outra-

geously uncivilized society that we even need laws against

murder. That fact by itself should prove that civilization has

not yet developed.

Murder is not thought of as stealing. But it is. It de-

prives another person of his life. Murder is usually not

thought of as an act of dishonesty. But it is. It is preceded

by dishonesty in the form of stealth and concealment of

4


10/130

weapons; conducted in dishonesty by care exerted to avoid

observation, detection and later arrest; then followed bydishonesty in the form of pretense that the murder was not

committed and by outright denial of guilt.

The basic flaw is dishonesty.

Each person expresses inborn dishonesty. The average

person takes what he wants and says anything he thinks

will get the result he wants. He is not concerned about

whether he is honest. He is just concerned about whether he

can manage to get his own way.

Of course many persons deny that. They assert that they

try hard to be honest. But if they look at the facts carefully

enough, they discover that they are not really trying to be

honest. Rather, they are trying hard to avoid the penalties of

dishonesty. They are trying not to get caught and branded

as liars or thieves. Rather, they are trying to avoid jail

terms. Some are trying to stay out of hell and get intoheaven.

There is always a motive other than the motive to be

honest although research shows that it is often subtly hid-

den.

Perhaps the most vigorous of all the denials that have

come to my attention have come from religious persons. In

the heat of their denials, they have quoted scripture by re-marks such as, The Bible says theres nothing new under

the sun! True, it does. But it also says, Behold, I make all

things new.

In an astonishing variety of ways, lies, outright lies,

have been used by those people to contradict, discredit and

oppose the importance of adopting absolute honesty as a

way of life.Some religious groups teach that children are not re-

sponsible, that they are innocent, that they do not know

5


11/130

right from wrong until age seven or eight. But children

younger than six have testified to the contrary. Every childwho understands the information presented here testified

that he knew right from wrong. Because of their recogni-

tion of personal responsibility, those children have been

able to make an exciting escape from the consequences of

their dishonesty and from the dishonesty itself. Results go

far beyond what people are likely to expect.

Not only has opposition come from religious persons,

but it has also come from scientific thinkers. Some of them

have become so eager to discredit the information that they

were willing to assert that the sum of two plus two does not

always equal fourand vehemently insist on the point.

Power of Motives

On various occasions I have stood in front of an audi-

ence with two silver dollars in my right hand and two silver

dollars in my left hand, placed one pair on top of the other,

and then counted four showing that two and two do equal

four. I have offered any doubter a chance to take the four

silver dollars and add two plus two and get five or five

thousand. I have offered the extra dollars as a reward forany person who could do it. For obvious reasons never was

there a taker. It is not possible to add two plus two correctly

and get anything but four. No more, no less. If it were, it

would obviously be possible with silver dollars.

That demonstration never changed the thinking of the

dishonest person. The reason is that what people say is de-

termined by their motives. They refuse to say what puts

them in the position of contradicting their motives, and that

is something they do not, at first, know about themselves.

6


12/130

Despite the foregoing, there exists what might be de-

scribed as a decent sector of society wherein people do tryto be honest. They try to tell the truth. They try to avoid

stealing. In a variety of other ways, they attempt to practice

the principles of honesty. They have been taught to do so in

their families, their churches and schools.

The result is what commonly passes for honesty in our

society, but it is only a fraction of what is needed to consti-

tute absolute honesty. It is a kind of superficial honesty

achieved not for the sake of honesty itself, but because

people assume they will be happier and get into less trouble

with the persons who deal with them. Some people assume

they will have a better chance of getting a heavenly reward.

Honesty for the sake of a reward is not true honesty.

The proof of honesty comes when a person is honest be-

cause it is the right way to behave.

When a person analyzes the difference between what hesays and what is the literal truth, he gets many shocks, es-

pecially when discussing his motives. When he puts atten-

tion on his motives as best he understands them, he is sur-

prised to discover that he hides many of them, falsifies

them as a means of hiding them and does everything he can

to avoid exposing them. Thus he discovers that he is not

absolutely honest about what he tells people in many of hisordinary conversations.

Control by Motives

When a person thinks carefully enough about the details

of his ordinary conversation, he discovers that in virtually

everything he says he ordinarily gives expression to one

factor only: whatever enables him to make the impression

he wants to make.

7


13/130

He rarely considers the factuality and correctness of his

remarks except insofar as he thinks factuality and correct-ness would help him to get the result he wants. His atten-

tion is on trying to make a favorable impression and avoid,

if possible, any unfavorable impressions.

When people notice someones irrational conversation,

they rarely consider it dishonest. They may regard it as

slipshod or as rationalizing, but usually they do not define

it. Sometimes they are too busy talking the same way them-

selves.

What passes for honesty in our society will be seen to

be very superficial compared with the real thing.

The reality about dishonesty cannot be discerned by a

person who does not closely and honestly inspect his con-

versation, his behavior and especially his thinking. If he is

fully honest, he discovers that he departs from reality in

various ways many times. He may do it repeatedly in hispatterns of thinking, conversation and behavior.

That was such unpopular information originally that

scores of techniques were devised as a means of getting

around the obstacles in peoples thinking and inducing

them to make experiments. Ultimately those experiments

had the effect of changing peoples approach to life so that

the extent of their dishonesty gradually became clear.Although members of our research group had originally

resented statements suggesting that they had dishonest in-

clinations, they gradually became aware that the greatest

proportion of their dishonesty had a way of expressing it-

self without their awareness.

During one phase of preparatory work several decades

ago, the term unconscious dishonesty was used as a meansof penetrating the block. Success was delayed for two

prominent reasons among others. One reason is that people

8


14/130


15/130

because of false or exaggerated claims. The deficit is out of

bounds because of the inclination of people in every seg-ment of society to take advantage in any conceivable way.

One clear consequence is an inflated economy that amounts

to wholesale theft. The value of savings leaks out of sav-

ings accounts, safe-deposit boxes, investments and what-

ever money people have in their purses and wallets. Some-

body else gets the value, and that is what constitutes the

theft.

Hidden Danger

Clear understanding of the breadth and depth of dishon-

esty in society is shocking to everybody who sees a tenth of

it. When that shock is multiplied by ten, it is seen that dis-

honesty on an unimagined scale has been incorporatedinto societys way of life. But peoples attention has been

diverted from that reality by concern that they would not be

able to act on their urgesthe precise urges causing the

unconscious dishonesty.

Hidden danger results not from peoples failure to avoid

obvious dishonesty but their failure to understand dishon-

esty in all its forms. People are hesitant about telling lieswhen they know they are lying. Yet they tell lie after lie

after lie without the awareness they are lying. They do it

when they misrepresent their motives and their thinking.

They do it when they say what they think will get results

they want without regard for correctness.

The average person is also confused about stealing.

When people avoid actually taking what does not be-

long. to them, they avoid only a small part of the stealing

that is rampant. They demand pay raises to which they are

not entitled, thus contributing to inflation; impose need-

10


16/130

lessly on other peoples time and attention; push ahead of

people waiting in line. Very few think of that commonplaceactivity as stealing, although an honest person sees that it

is.

Obviously many people have limited awareness of the

full nature of both lying and stealing.

Beyond the concepts of ordinary dishonesty is a con-

cept of honesty that transcends both conscious and uncon-

scious dishonesty. Experimenters who have done the work

leading to these findings characteristically refer to it as ab-

solute honestyand more commonly as absolute right.

Quite possibly the concept of absolute right has been

argued against, ridiculed, discredited, and rejected even

more rigorously than has the notion that people are univer-

sally dishonest. But the concept of absolute right represents

the reality of the kind of honesty that should be achieved. It

is demonstrated that failure to achieve it causes the flaws inpeoples thinking that make them irrational, puts them out

of touch with reality, and causes them to issue a large pro-

portion of all their routine invitations to trouble of all kinds.

Inherited Mistakes

Even the children who successfully applied the perti-

nent information have demonstrated that the failures, prob-

lems and fears of ordinary life diminish in direct proportion

to the success achieved in making the changes that result

from adoption of absolute honesty.

The reason for that needs to be understood.

Each generation has contributed its share to the per-

petuation of the sad state of affairs that exists. That state is

one in which not only is each person born with dishonest

tendencies, but in carrying the burden of providing educa-

11


17/130

tion for children, the older generation has lacked the

knowledge and inclination to remedy matters by raising thelevel of honesty. Parents, teachers and others responsible

for the education of children have seen no reason why they

should attempt to raise childrens honesty above the level

of their own.

Under analysis the reason for that oversight is clear.

How could a parent or teacher enable a child to over-

come inclinations to express unconscious dishonesty

when neither the parent nor the teacher ever learned to

detect unconscious dishonesty in himself? The fact that no

generation espoused absolute honesty has kept a restrictive

ceiling over the level of honesty achievable by any genera-

tion. But now, a small segment of the present generation is

demonstrating that it has overcome the problem of penetrat-

ing that restrictive ceiling.

If there has never been an honest generation, at least,one is getting started. That statement might seem like an

exaggeration to a person who has not seen the evidence.

Very possibly he might brand the statement as false, but

only because of his dishonesty whether he is aware of it or

not.

Peoples opposition and resentment often cause them to

display irresponsibility.It is an act of irresponsibility to deny any statement

without the ability to support the denial. It is an act of dis-

honesty to refuse to look at the evidence that supports a

statement while denying the validity of the statement. It is

an act of dishonesty to dissuade other persons from partici-

pating in a program that is based on obviously correct in-

formation. Those and other misleading acts of dishonestywere performed by persons who will change when they un-

derstand.

12


18/130

Cause of the Flaw

Whether conscious or unconscious, dishonesty has

blighted the intelligence of the very persons who should

have strongest inclination to look directly at the reality and

determine what statements flow out of that reality.

That puts attention on the precise description of the na-

ture of the flaw with which a person is born.

Not enough description of that flaw is provided by astatement that people are born dishonest. A more illuminat-

ing statement is needed. Perhaps one found in the descrip-

tion of a specific situation in which they display dishonesty.

The flaw is expressed in what could correctly be de-

scribed as a persons wrong approach to life.

The reality is that ordinarily nobody has the conscious

intent to be dishonest. He does not purposely adopt theintent to steal or lie or to take advantage. He just has the

intent to get his own way by acting on his urges and the

way he feels. That makes him act on the inclinations that

arise from his motives and urges whether they are con-

scious or unconscious.

His driving force is not a motive to be dishonest but

simply a motive to get his own way.During situation after situation, he is frustrated in his

efforts to get his own way. He reacts emotionally to the

frustration and thinks, says and does something wrong. But

whether he is frustrated or is merely proceeding in an un-

hindered manner to get his own way, his real intent is to do

whatever he wants to do. And in his conversation, his real

intent is to say whatever he wants to say.

He rarely sees any reason to consider whether he is

honest or not. As an infant, he cannot know the difference

between honesty and dishonesty. He needs to learn it, but

13


19/130

each older generation has made the mistake of teaching

only that kind of honesty it understands and only as muchas the older generation wants to teach. It is not comprehen-

sive: Parents often ask their children to make untruthful

statements to avoid embarrassment for the parents.

The Serious Threat

Parents teach only the portion of honesty that they ap-prove of and understand. If they do not know about uncon-

scious dishonesty, they are unable to teach it. The experi-

menters discovered that the damage done by unconscious

dishonesty is vastly more extensive than the damage done

by conscious dishonesty.

Conscious dishonesty gets children scolded and pun-

ished at home and at school. It gets adults arrested, jailedand worse. But unconscious dishonesty is far more ram-

pant. It expresses itself many times oftener than conscious

dishonesty because it flows out of unconscious motives that

ordinarily cannot be detected. For that reason the danger of

unconscious dishonesty has gone unrecognized.

It is consistently concealed behind a wall of fear lest it

be exposed. It is often used to justify various kinds of ac-tion that any thoughtful person readily recognizes as

wrong. It has caused people to refuse to receive and con-

sider the information that would enable them to see the re-

ality.

The inclination of the individual to get his own way, at

first glance, need not be regarded as dishonest. It need only

be recognized as the reality. Then, under analysis, the de-

sire for ones way is seen as an inclination that has to de-

pend on dishonesty for gratification. The inclination diverts

attention away from considerations of right and wrong, ig-

14


20/130

noring consideration of dishonesty, because it directs atten-

tion toward efforts to satisfy the inclination.The result is carelessness about thinking.

While a person is careless about his thinking, he can

successfully disregard his lying, cheating, stealing, taking

advantage, and other dishonest practices. He can success-

fully disregard the fact that he is falsifying his thinking and

conversation, misrepresenting his behavior and concealing

his true motives. He can habitually engage in those per-

formances as a way of life without ever becoming aware of

his dishonesty until he develops the willingness to look at

the reality of what is happening.

When a person does look, he makes many astonishing

discoveries. One of those discoveries is that in teaching

honesty and avoidance of dishonesty to children, successive

generations of parents have confronted their children with

an impossible contradiction that cannot be resolved untilthe dishonesty is recognized and dropped.

Each generation has taught children to adopt motives,

seek advantages and to behave in ways that are given re-

spectful consideration by society. Such action cannot be

carried out without dishonesty.

Parents admonish their children to be honest, while at

the same time, they teach behavior patterns that requiredishonesty. In that way they confront the rising generation

with behavioral requirements that are unrealistic and cannot

be met. The parents are in the position of expecting chil-

dren honestly to engage in a dishonest way of life.

Few persons have honestly considered the contradictory

pattern just described.

In the beginning a careful person sees the evidence thatsuch is the pattern. He may think he has seen it all when, in

fact, he sees just a tiny piece. As he extends his areas of

15


21/130

observation, he gets shock after shock after shock. That

process goes on during a period of continuing shocks as hesees how many respected performances of public and pri-

vate life actually depend on dishonesty for their accom-

plishment.

Systems of Reasoning

As understanding grows, an entirely new pattern ofthinking becomes observable. Those persons who have

done the successful experimenting have seen the new pat-

tern. Having seen that, they are able to recognize and un-

derstand the old pattern. They become aware that two dia-

metrically opposite systems of reasoning are available to

the general public. One of those systems is dishonest, and

it forces people to make a more or less constant effort to behonest. But only the dishonesty of the dishonest system ne-

cessitates their effort to be honest, and the dishonesty often

frustrates that effort.

In a subtle way, any resulting honesty becomes just an

expression of unconscious dishonesty.

That is a concept that may be difficult for a person to

understand until after he has gained understanding of bothsystems of reasoning. He is helped when he realizes that no

person need try to be honest unless he is tempted to be dis-

honest. Also when he realizes that honesty is sometimes

used as a tool to achieve a dishonest purpose.

From the foregoing, it becomes evident that honesty as

a policy cannot be genuine honesty. Rather it is a counter-

feit procedure used to get an advantage. But advantage it-

self is dishonest, for the simple reason that a person cannot

get an advantage except by disadvantaging at least one

other person.

16


22/130

That suggests a kind of unnoticed dishonesty that is

rampant everywhere in human affairs.On the surface it might seem that the ordinary system of

reasoning could be called a system of honesty because the

better portion of society lives in that system and does try to

be honest. But that effort is needed only because of the dis-

honesty that is inherent in the system.

The really basic distinction is not adequately described

in terms of honesty and dishonesty. It is better described by

the names of the two systems commonly used by the ex-

perimenters who helped in the research: the relative system

of reasoning and the absolute system of reasoning.

The Subtle Trap

Each person is born into the relative system in which aperson spends his life trying to act on his urges. Conse-

quently he tends to be indiscriminate about both honesty

and dishonesty in ways he does not suspect. He seldom

tries to be honest or dishonest. He merely tries to get his

own way. If he thinks honesty will get it, he tends to be

honest. If he thinks dishonesty will get it, he tends to be

dishonest. Except on rare occasions, he fails to notice eitherthe honesty or the dishonesty.

What is wrong with the system is that it keeps his atten-

tion on his urges to get his own way and diverts his atten-

tion from the reality of his predicament. When he changes

his system of reasoning, his urges lose their hold on his

mind.

The absolute system of reasoning is to be regarded as

neither an honest system nor a dishonest system. It is a sys-

tem in which a person need not attempt to be honest be-

cause there is no dishonesty in the system.

17


23/130

Honesty and dishonesty become irrelevant in the abso-

lute system, because in that system, a person does not rea-son from his urges based on contradictory motives. Instead,

he reasons from reality, and he does not try to get his own

way. Instead, he tries to take whatever action is called for

by the reality of whatever is happening.

He cannot do that if he falsifies reality in his thoughts.

If he successfully falsifies reality to himself, he be-

comes irrational because he loses touch with reality. In ad-

dition if he successfully falsifies reality to others, they may

take irrational action because they believe his falsification.

When a person reasons from his motives, his urges, his

likes and dislikes, his attention is not on reality. That is ex-

actly what is wrong with the relative system of reasoning: It

separates a person from whatever reality he disregards.

Consequently he makes unrealistic decisions that cannot

work satisfactorily. They invite trouble.Because he fails to understand the two systems, he fails

to realize that his disregard for reality is responsible for his

trouble. He fails to realize that he has brought the trouble

on himself, so he tends to blame it on other people or on

conditions outside himself. Therefore, he cannot eliminate

it.

When he learns to reason from reality, his troubles re-duce. His behavioral problems become solvable and can be

eliminated. His conflicts diminish.

Of course, that is not what he expects in the beginning.

Instead, he is afraid. He fears that his past misdeeds will be

discovered and bring him disgrace. But honesty does not

require that a person expose his secrets. In a dishonest

world, exposing secrets invites additional trouble.Things are different in the absolute system.

18


24/130

The record shows that people in the absolute system

achieve a kind of satisfaction and success formerly unat-tainable. It is true that each person is figuratively caught

with his hand in the cookie jar, but it is also true that all the

others know he is reformed. The result is a new kind of

freedom in which nobody holds anything against any-

body.

The person who feels an inclination to deny or refute

what is said in this section demonstrates his pressing need

for the information. He may not recognize his need, but the

persons who understand the information recognize it.

They know he needs information about himself, and

about his unconscious motives. Perhaps also about what-

ever group he may represent.

Every objection to the information has come from a

person who failed to see the reality behind the information.That reality is convincing.

It discloses many attractive opportunities.

Many persons who formerly objected to the information

decided to take another look, saw what they had missed and

changed their minds. A typical comment from those per-

sons is this: When a person gets correct understanding, he

suddenly does an about-face. After that, he cant not startmaking constructive changes in his life!

19


25/130

Preface to Part II

What is said in this section will increase the productiv-

ity and effectiveness of every person or group of persons

who study and apply the information. That has been shown

by persons from many walks of life, of virtually all ages

and various degrees of education and experience.

The information already has a long history.

It was formalized forty years ago after more than

twenty years of incubation. It developed into an extremely

complicated and ramified body of knowledge that, at last, is

reduced to certain essentials readily comprehensible by any

person who devotes honest attention to it.

Even small children now show comprehension.

Getting the information understood by small childreninvolved a procedure of teaching first the grandparents,

then the parents, then a group of sons and daughters who

taught still younger kids and continued down the line until

the information was received by preschool children.

From that work, an improved life has emerged.

20


26/130

Part II

The Basic Law

Three distinct kinds of laws influence the behavior of

people. In this section they are designated as man-made,

self-made, and natural or God-made laws. Experienceshows that the persons who get understanding of all three

kinds make spectacular improvements in their lives.

They discover the basic cause of trouble.

That enables a person to change his approach to life in

ways that let him avoid innumerable kinds of ordinary dis-

tress. It enables him to end a multitude of burdensome

problems that he had thought were a necessary part of life.It enables him to find and establish a safe plan of life in

which things tend to work out satisfactorily for everybody.

At first those statements may seem exaggerated, but

they are no exaggeration to the persons who correctly un-

derstand all three kinds of laws mentioned above.

They know that the understanding has important uses.

They watched quarrels, arguments, disagreements andconflicts diminish and disappear from their lives. They

watched young people suddenly stop their trouble over

smoking, drinking, drugs, sex, vandalism and shoplifting.

They watched adults make astonishing improvements in

their personal and vocational lives. They watched small

children achieve behavioral improvements that virtually

eliminated the necessity for discipline by scoldings and

punishments from teachers and parents.

For each person who gains correct understanding, those

improvements are the norm. Any person who devotes really

21


27/130

careful attention to the details until he understands them

then knows that the foregoing statements are indeed cor-rect.

Unrefuted Evidence

He discovers that many kinds of trouble result from his

being guided by the wrong laws.

He does not have to accept that information on faith orbecause it is stated by someone in authority. He sees the

reality himself. He gladly acts in accord with that reality

because he sees it as the way out of trouble he could not

formerly avoid.

He understands exactly why the information was ini-

tially evaded and suppressed and why it seemed offensive

at first. He becomes aware that only misunderstandingsmade it seem offensive. He recognizes it as a way of get-

ting mental and emotional relief and release.

He also learns about a sound approach to safe learning.

He gets his information from the printed page, but that

is not what provides real understanding. At first he cannot

be sure whether the information is correct. If he judges it oraccepts a judgment from someone else, he just substitutes

the judgment for the information. Judgments are not reli-

able.

He should look carefully at the reality to which the in-

formation points. That approach is what brings understand-

ing because reality constitutes the natural source of evi-

dence that cannot honestly be refuted.

In effect, a person who looks at the reality is learning

from the book of life. He is getting safe information be-

cause he is learning in precisely the same way as he earlier

22


28/130

learned about black and white, up and down, big and little,

night and day.Nobody could possibly convince him that black is

white, up is down, big is little, or night is day because he

has direct knowledge of the evidence. The information is

safe because he has seen the reality.

A person learns about man-made laws from other peo-

ple. Those laws are often disagreeable.

They come from parents: Dont touch! They come

from teachers: Be quiet! They come from strangers:

Look out! They also come from clubs, unions, employ-

ers, churches and governments.

The same person must think carefully to learn about

self-made laws. They arise inside his mind: Ill do as I

please! If he thinks about how they work, he can see that

he must enforce them himself, although man-made laws are

enforced by others. He may also see that neither man-madelaws nor self-made laws are either fully rational or genu-

inely reliable.

The fact is that natural laws are both rational and reli-

able.

A person learns about natural laws without realizing

that he is learning about them early in life. For example,

consider how a toddler learns about gravity by falling andgetting bumped.

People learn that natural laws are special.

They may disobey man-made laws. They may struggle

desperately to enforce self-made laws. But they are helpless

in the grip of natural laws. They are compelled to live or

die by those laws, and that is why people show great re-

spect for gravity.Consider how children try to balance when learning to

walk. Consider how carefully adults move on a slippery

23


29/130

surface. Consider how everybody struggles to regain his

balance the instant he has lost it.Their actions show peoples respect for the law of grav-

ity.

They have similar respect for every natural law they

recognize. They carefully avoid trouble with heat, electric-

ity, poisons and approaching vehicles.

A person literally cannot disobey a natural law. Even

while falling to his death because he failed to keep his bal-

ance, he goes on obeying the law of gravity.

Underlying Principles

A person shows respect for natural laws because there

is no other way he can avoid the trouble that results when

he disregards them.By allowing for them properly, he is safe.

He does not get burned, shocked, poisoned, or bumped

unless he lets himself be negligent about some natural law.

If he is negligent, the outcome is the same for him as for

anybody else. Natural laws make no concession for his ig-

norance, innocence, education, intelligence, religion or any-

thing else.Despite those facts, people cause themselves trouble by

making two common mistakes.

First, a person may have his attention diverted from po-

tential danger as when he watches an attractive stranger

while crossing a street. Second, he may disregard a behav-

ioral principle as when he is dishonest without concern for

his reputation.

People tend to think of principles as something scien-

tific that is learned from a textbook or from a college

24


30/130

course. But principles are ever present in nature, where any

person can notice them.What child ever learned how to balance himself while

taking his first few steps by reading a textbook?

Principles determine that action causes reaction, that

water expands as it freezes, and that gases can be com-

pressed. Those principles are taught, but significant princi-

ples exist that are not taught.

Principles determine that a person cannot walk through

a closed door, that he must breathe both in and out, and that

he cannot nourish his body on broken glasseven though

no textbook says so.

Anybody can readily see that principles do exert con-

trol, and that everybody must act in accord with principles

if he is to have a satisfactory life.

Many principles are so very obvious that people auto-

matically take them into account without giving them con-scious attention. Everybody sees that they must be obeyed.

A person who failed to live in accord with them, along with

a multitude of principles which are less obvious, would

clearly experience one trouble after another. The reason is

that genuine principles are natural laws.

They are self-enforcing. No person can outwit them

however he tries. Anyone who could outwit them would beable to walk right through closed doors, violate rules of

breathing, and thrive on broken glassin outright defiance

of reality.

Principles are obviously Pieces of reality that both de-

termine and explain how things work.

Nothing ever happens in a persons daily affairs that is

not controlled by principles. Consequently anybody whounderstands principles should understand what causes trou-

25


31/130

ble. That enables him to avoid the trouble that arises be-

cause principles are disregarded.It should be easy to realize that people get into trouble

by disregarding principles necessary to safe living. How-

ever, those principles are often disregardedwith danger-

ous and sometimes disastrous results.

Principles determine that nobody is healthy if he regu-

larly gets insufficient sleep, that a person who keeps an-

tagonizing others has arguments, and that everybody needs

to learn and notice what he is doing as the way to prevent

accidents and stay out of trouble.

Those principles are commonly understood, but they

are also commonly disregarded. That naturally leads to

trouble. Some factor causes people to disregard them, and

that factor is given attention next.

Counterfeit Principles

No sane person steps off the edge of a high roof expect-

ing to glide gently downward by power of will. He may

urgently desire the applause that such a spectacular accom-

plishment might engender, but he is unable to make either

of the two common mistakes by which people invite theirtrouble.

In the above situation, he cannot divert his attention

from the potential danger. Nor can he successfully disre-

gard the obvious principle of gravity. But every person is

inclined to make those mistakes on many occasions when

danger or an applicable principle is less easily recognized.

Principles are derived from natural laws, and they all

operate together to produce a resultant force that is com-

pletely dependable. Consider, for example, the way a per-

son rides a bicycle. Whenever he leans for a turn, he must

26


32/130

instinctively and precisely adjust to the influences of grav-

ity and centrifugal force.If he fails to do that, he loses his balance. If he suc-

ceeds, he keeps his balance. In either case the effect is pre-

cisely determined by the cause.

It is a genuine principle that a person loses his balance

unless he properly adjusts to influences from all natural

laws. That implies another genuine principle:A person can

depend on natural laws to make himself safe in every

situation that arises.

Any person should easily see that depending on natural

laws in the form of genuine principles can make him safe in

physical situations. But the clear implication is that depend-

ing on natural laws also makes a person safe in every other

situation.

For example, in his dealings with people.

Experimenters have shown that disregard for the prin-ciples of natural law is what engenders peoples quarrels,

bickerings, misunderstandings, disagreements and outright

battles. The person who carefully analyzes the details sees

how. But perhaps the details are most easily described in

relation to matters that involve formation of compulsions.

Consider a person starting a compulsion to engage in

smoking, drinking, drug abuse or other crime.He disregards approaching danger by putting his atten-

tion on a wanted result. He also disregards genuine princi-

ples of natural law by substituting what in this book is de-

scribed as counterfeit principles of self-made laws. They

obscure his danger.

27


33/130


34/130

cedure by which their compulsive wrong behavior started

and gained control.Three distinct steps are often involved. First, natural

laws are disregarded. Second, man-made laws are ig-

nored. Third, self-made laws are formulated and adopted.

Each of the self-made laws became what is described as a

counterfeit principle because it lacks proper conformity

with nature.

Thus another genuine principle is made evident: Trou-

ble is invited by substitution of counterfeit principles for

genuine principles. Obviously that principle also constitutes

a natural law of behavior.

The fact that self-made laws are unnatural should now

be evident. They are not a part of creation and consequently

are not enforced by nature. They must be enforced by the

person himself. Enforcing them is difficult and frequently

impossible because they tend to disregard both man-madeand natural laws.

Often they actually contradict those laws.

The analysis of self-made laws quickly shows that they

are not rational. They always contain details that contradict

man-made or natural laws and consequently lead to trouble.

They frequently contradict other self-made laws he formed

and adopted and frequently cause him to oppose other per-sons who have adopted self-made laws of their own.

Consider the start of a compulsion to smoke as it might

be initiated in the mind of a young person.

He has read the warnings in cigarette advertising. He

has been told not to smoke and has seen kids punished for

smoking. He has heard storekeepers refuse to sell cigarettes

to kids because it is illegal. And he has been told thatsmoking cuts down wind, involves risk of fire, and invites

emphysema, heart trouble and lung cancer.

29


35/130

He has thus been subjected to the influences of both

man-made and natural laws. Despite that, he starts formingself-made laws that contradict what he has learned. And the

self-made laws win.

Genuine Principles

The reason the self-made laws win is that they flow out

of a persons intent to get his own way. That intent is whatmakes him a slave to his urges against his own best inter-

ests. It forces him to make choices in accord with his likes

and dislikesnot because of likes and dislikes but because

that is how he determines what is his own way.

Trying to get his own way is the only system he knows.

He always lived under it. He equates it with freedom al-

though it enslaves him to the trouble his urges so frequentlylead him into.

At first he cannot escape from that system.

He cannot directly change his likes and dislikes because

of his intent. He cannot change his intent because his atten-

tion is diverted from it by likes and dislikes. But when he

understands clearly and correctly what is involved, he can

put attention on his intent, take it away from his likes anddislikes, and put it on reality. After he has done that, his

likes and dislikes begin rearranging themselves in accord

with reality rather than with his urges.

That change takes him out of the relative system of

reasoning in which decisions are based on urges. It intro-

duces him to the absolute system of reasoning in which

decisions are based on reality.

The same driving force continues to propel him, but it

sends him in a different direction. Instead of controlling

him in accord with urges based on his motives, it controls

30


36/130


37/130

tional and right. His understanding causes him to reverse

his basic approach to life.Before that reversal, he accepts dictation from his

urges. He lets them enslave him by controlling his wants. It

is as if a subtle, insidious force had reached into his head

and turned a mental switch the wrong direction, sending

him into a life of willing servitude during which he disre-

gards numerous pieces of reality so he can get his own way.

That attitude contradicts his real interests.

The disregarded pieces of reality are still there, and they

cause trouble for him. Because he disregarded those pieces

of reality, he does not realize how he invited the trouble.

Consequently he persists in his destructive program of life

without any awareness of the mechanism behind it

without the awareness that there is a means of remedy.

That goes on until he understands what is happening.

Then, in effect, he turns the switch the other way. He doesit by deciding that he will no longer accept dictation from

his urges and that he will turn to reality for his future deci-

sions.

That change leads to a life of rationality.

At first a person is afraid to make the change. All his

life he has been living by urges. He trusts them. They point

him in the direction of what he expects sooner or later willbring him happiness and real satisfaction.

Those expectations are never realized.

The reason is that urges cause a person to disregard the

pieces of reality that must be taken into account to cause

happiness and satisfaction. They are the same pieces of re-

ality that he dislikes, because he is afraid of them. So he

refuses to consider them, although if he did, he would dis-cover that his fear is entirely groundless.

32


38/130

He is afraid to consider the possibility that he does in-

deed cause his own trouble, but until he considers the real-ity, he cannot make that discovery.

Consequently he cannot stop his trouble.

He is afraid he will not get his own way. But he is not

getting it. He is afraid he will have to take action he dis-

likes. But he is already taking it. He is afraid he will be un-

able to do what he likes. But he is already unable. He is

afraid he will lose his friends. But that fear is part of what

locks him in trouble. He is afraid of becoming irrational.

But fear is already making him irrational because it diverts

his attention away from reality.

Irrationality is the result of disregarding reality. The

way to achieve rationality is to look directly at the precise

reality of whatever is happening and take right action.

Life Without Fear

Reality appears harsh to many persons because they

misunderstand it. Looking at reality is as easy as noticing

an approaching vehicle before crossing a street. It brings

protection that makes a person safe, but people frequently

think of reality in ways that tend to give it a bad reputation.In trying situations, they have been told to face reality.

Therefore, reality tends to be associated in their minds with

numerous trying situations.

What could be more trying than awakening in a hospital

and discovering that you are there because you failed to

notice the reality of an approaching vehicle? Noticing the

reality might obviously have prevented the trying situation.

That example shows how a person avoids trouble by look-

ing at reality.

33


39/130

The hospitalized victim of an automobile accident

might easily remember that he did indeed fail to look forthe approaching vehicle. But many causes of trouble are

more difficult to identify.

After a person gets the trouble he invited by disregard-

ing reality, he usually fails to realize that he invited it be-

cause the sequence of cause and effect is almost always

more obscure. Also he is so busy struggling with the result-

ing situation of harsh reality that he rarely looks for the ear-

lier reality he disregarded. That reality is the kind he thinks

of when he judges that reality is harsh.

He may think of the problems he cannot solve: misbe-

havior by his children, arguments with his spouse, dissatis-

faction with his employment, his stomach ulcer, difficulty

meeting credit card payments and perhaps a multitude of

other problems.

He tries to forget his difficulties by reading books andnewspapers or watching TV, going to movies or nightclubs,

submerging himself in some work or hobby, getting drunk

or high on drugs. He engages in various activities to escape

from the reality that is indeed harsh.

An understanding person knows that disregarding real-

ity invites trouble. He also knows that there is a successful

formula for escape.There is indeed, and it is being used by enough persons

to demonstrate that it is liberating.

Ignored reality causes trouble. Learning to inspect that

reality prevents the trouble. It also eliminates the need to

deal with recurring trouble. It constitutes a formula for es-

caping into the life without fear.

34


40/130

Unscientific Thinking

Instead of avoiding harsh reality, a person should put

his mind on it. That statement may cause people to cringe

but only because they are using the wrong, relative system

of reasoning.

Changing to the absolute system is releasing.

Considering harsh reality provides a powerful incentive

for change. But something more is needed than improve-ment in watching for approaching vehicles or even antici-

pating possible death from lung cancer after forty years of

smoking. Nobody could develop enough ingenuity and cau-

tion to anticipate the outcome of every potentially danger-

ous situation. Instead, a person should put attention on

causes as they arise, something he cannot do while he

keeps attention on results.That is the danger of relative system thinking.

Reasoning from an urge directs attention toward a

wanted result and away from danger. The urge suggests

that the end justifies the means, and that drives attention

toward forming counterfeit principles intended to produce

wanted results.

Peoples urges spontaneously cause emotion.What is here called an urge does not arise from natural

laws nor from man-made laws. Instead, urges arise from

self-made laws, resulting from personal motives that tend

to disregard reality. Consequently urges invite frustration

and when the frustration comes, the emotion is intensified.

By remembering situations of that kind, a person is able

to reason from their reality. By doing so, he sees evidence

that under emotion intelligence is reduced. While his atten-

tion is directed toward a wanted result, it is diverted from

the reality that would show the invitation to trouble.

35


41/130

That creates the precise situation in which trouble is of-

ten invited without a persons awareness.The following are additional self-made laws that a per-

son commonly installs in his mind: I can get away with

this if Im careful. I have to take advantage of every op-

portunity that arises. This is my big chance. As long as

I get what I want, nothing else matters. That is exactly the

sort of thinking that produces self-made laws. The resulting

counterfeit principles lead to urges that invite all kinds of

trouble.

Scientific Thinking

Decisions based on man-made laws keep a person out

of trouble with the authorities. Decisions based on natural

or God-made laws keep a person out of trouble with allcreationincluding authorities. Decisions based on self-

made laws move a person toward ultimate disaster because

they divert attention away from natural laws.

The foregoing explanation is how man does indeed in-

vite his own trouble. When a person traces out the sequence

of cause and effect he sees how that trouble can be ended.

The whole story can be read from the reality of whateverhappenssomething earlier referred to as the book of life.

Some persons have objected to that wording. They say

it contradicts scriptural writings, but their comments indi-

cate superficial thinking.

No concept in this book represents the opinion of a

person. Instead, every concept was learned by looking di-

rectly at the reality from which every other person must

also learn. Any scriptural or other writings that contradict

pieces of reality would clearly be incorrect.

Reasoning from reality makes a person safe.

36


42/130

There are better scriptural correlations with reality than

the religionists have commonly noticed. For one, God isquoted as having said, I will put my law in their inward

parts, and write it in their hearts. What is more clearly

lodged in the system of a persons thinking than the law of

gravity?

That is where a basic natural law should be.

People have polluted the sanctuary of their hearts and

minds with self-made laws. During moments of emotion,

people form them in profusion. They turn out to be what

is warring against the natural laws.

Every self-made law is a separate and distinct counter-

feit principle that gets used as a premise in a persons rou-

tine processes of thinking. Consequently those wrong

premises become the bases of decisions that are misleading

because they are not based on genuine principles.

Clearly seen, the sequence of cause and effect lookssimple. However, it is dangerous because counterfeit prin-

ciples lead to counterfeit conclusions and are unconsciously

used as premises.

A person seldom recognizes his processes of logic

while they are in operation. Consider an example: Oncom-

ing vehicles endanger people in their path; I am in such a

path; I should move. That example makes the point.It expresses a genuine principle. It then expresses what

may be a fact from which a safe conclusion clearly follows.

It represents sound reasoning.

People use genuine principles in various routine deci-

sions. So they lift their feet to step up, talk loudly enough to

make themselves heard, and avoid throwing lighted

matches into wastebaskets. People also use counterfeitprinciples in their routine thinking, causing wrong conclu-

sions.

37


43/130

Every counterfeit principle invites trouble.

A person may decide, I can always get my way by try-ing.

That is a counterfeit principle that cannot be effectu-

ated. The person who continues to reason from it is sure to

become frustrated.

No natural law leads a person to adopt self-made laws.

Nor does any man-made law. What does?

Only his persistent intent to get his own way.

Because he continues reasoning from counterfeit prin-

ciples and the urges they engender, he keeps traveling a

wrong path of lifeuntil he understands his mistakes.

Then he sees that no action is right unless it conforms

with natural laws and genuine principles. He sees that

self-made laws make a person inattentive to natures basic

law of behavior: Right action gets right results, whereas

wrong action gets wrong results.

Intelligence

In considering the foregoing information, a newcomer

to it necessarily uses the relative system of reasoning. Con-

sequently he may dislike the information because it tellshim that he should abandon all his urges and inclinations

that are based on the motives he is incessantly trying to sat-

isfy.

At first the change makes no sense to him.

Rarely does anyone attempt a careful analysis of the in-

formation. Instead, people may turn away from it because

that is just what their urges and inclinations make them

want to do. If pressed into considering the information,

they may react by forming judgments about it. Instantly the

38


44/130

judgments become counterfeit principles that insulate their

minds.That has happened even to scientific thinkers.

It is a purpose of scientific thinking to exclude personal

opinions and to include every pertinent perception of real-

ity. After a person has done both, he knows that his conclu-

sions are correct.

He sees that real intelligence is an impersonal quality

that is expressed when a person reasons from reality.

He sees that there is a misleading kind of intelligence in

the relative system of reasoning that depends on urges aris-

ing from motives. He also sees that there is a natural intel-

ligence in the absolute system that transcends any kind of

meddling.

He learns to depend on that intelligence.

By depending on it, he discovers the principle of prin-

ciples: Counterfeit principles are misleading; therefore,only genuine principles should be used as premises on

which decisions are based.

He learns to eliminate counterfeit principles.

As soon as he tries, he can learn to recognize them. He

can also learn to find the genuine principles in the reality of

his life. After he gets the idea, dropping counterfeit princi-

ples becomes a fascinating pursuit until he succeeds in rea-soning only in the absolute system of genuine principles

based on reality.

At the heart of peoples objections, there is a moral

consideration. It relates to the distinctions between right

and wrong that cannot be determined solely by reference to

man-made or self-made laws but can be determined with

the assistance of natural or God-made laws found in reality.People are slow to accept moral considerations.

39


45/130

They have an unfortunate inclination to imagine that

right action sometimes gets wrong results and that wrongaction sometimes gets right results.

They use that thinking to justify their errors.

People who have learned to reason from reality under-

stand what is involved. They support each other in right

action while withholding support for wrong action. They

observe that the basic law of absolute right is the natural

law governing human behavior. They rely on it as natu-

rally as they rely on gravity. They live by its principle: Al-

ways think, say and do what is right.

They enjoy a genuinely satisfactory plan of life.

40


46/130

Preface to Part III

This section describes and explains the basic plan for

introducing sanity into the stream of human affairs. Any-

body who considers the details carefully enough soon real-

izes that the plan is entirely natural. It is as natural as grav-

ity, as time, as rotation of the earth and all other reality.

The plan is not invented. It was observed.

Numerous persons were taught to observe itpersons

of many ages and both sexes from many walks of life. Once

observed, as was stated earlier, it changes a persons ap-

proach to the future.

A simple factor often kept it from being observed.

People do not like to consider whatever they regard as

anathematic, and they wont consider it. Anathema is mis-placed when directed toward the plan that is being dis-

cussed here.

Objection to the plan for introducing sanity into the

stream of human affairs says something about how con-

fused peoples minds have become. It shows that objectors

have not yet observed the reality.

41


47/130

Part III

The Basic Plan

People like fun, enjoyment, comfort, and a sense of

well-being. They like thrills, excitement, feelings of impor-

tance.They like having their own way. But they get too little

of what they like and too much of what they dislike, so they

seek balms.

They go to parties and nightclubs, watch TV, drink, use

palliatives and mind-benders and uppers and downers and

engage in risky activities.

People submit to a lot of what they dislike.They dislike being criticized, blamed and condemned.

They dislike drudgery, getting teeth drilled by a dentist or

undergoing a dangerous operation. Yet they submit to such

hardships, sometimes at great cost in money and suffering.

They accept hardships whenever they feel the cost of not

accepting them is greater than the cost of accepting them.

People have unanswered questions about life.What could possibly be rational about likes that lead to

trouble? Or about dislikes that force a person to reject do-

ing what is rational?

Those particular questions have an answer.

People are driven by urges to act in accord with likes

and dislikes that are based on their motives, often uncon-

scious. They keep trying to get what they like and avoid

what they dislike. In the process they hurt themselves men-

tally, emotionally and physicallyso they need more and

more balm.

42


48/130

Evidence shows that people are living by an irrational

plan of life: acting on urges and getting wrong results. Or-dinary corrective measures accomplish little more than to

let people continue in the same dreary pattern of problems

and trouble. But there is an absolutely rational alternative:

acting on reality and getting right results.

Persons who are doing it all say that it works.

Escape from TroubleActing on urges predestines people to form compul-

sions they cannot stop. The reason is that they willingly

accept the dictates of their urges without realizing that they

are inviting trouble.

Urges are supported only by human authority.

Acting on impulses from reality is safe because realityis a part of creation. Rather than being based on human au-

thority, reality is based on the natural authority that utterly

controls whatever exists and however it operates.

Reality has the true authority of the Creator.

When understood, there is a basic plan of control that

replaces a persons urges with an intent to reason from real-

ity.

Two plans of life are available: one based on peoples

urges and the other based on reality. Conventionally people

live by the plan based on their urges although they dislike

many of its consequences. At first they may dislike the plan

based on reality because they feel it might force them into

an unattractive way of life.

Some incautiously shut their minds to it, continue act-

ing on urges and go on living by hope. If so, hope is about

43


49/130

all they ever get because their hope stays unfulfilled. If they

surmount their dislike, they begin to enjoy a better life.The plan based on reality does seem shocking at first.

To some it seems too idealistic. It consternates conven-

tional people, and they hesitate to consider it. They tend to

condemn it before they understand it. That is irrational.

When they understand it, they realize that the plan based on

reality is scientific, religious and essential to the elimina-

tion of problems and trouble that beset people so long as

their urges control their decisions.

People keep struggling to fulfill their dreams by seeking

fame, wealth and high position. They often attempt to

dominate other people and force changes in their behavior.

No matter what success they seem to achieve, they want

more.

That pattern repeatedly appears in the public press.

Television newscasts report regularly on the frequencywith which lives of the rich and famous end in disappoint-

ment and despair. Often they describe the tragic lives of

persons blessed with prosperous careers who are so desper-

ate they resort to alcohol and other drugs, popular treat-

ments and even suicide.

Those tragic consequences result from allowing urges

to dictate a persons plan of life. They do not result fromliving by realitys plan of life. On the contrary, careful at-

tention to the appropriate reality promptly lifts a person out

of the desperate consequences of his frustrated hopes.

There are people proving it.

They understand the basic plan of control which en-

abled them to end their dislike of what at first seemed unat-

tractive. They want more people to know that the basic plannaturally improves the thinking and behavior of anyone

44


50/130

who is given information about it and studies it until he un-

derstands it.They see the basic plan as the natural method for get-

ting the whole human race out of trouble. They see it as the

master plan for a life of true satisfaction.

The persons who understand see a formula at work. It is

as simple as the formula that makes a person wait so he will

be safe before crossing the street. It is as simple as the for-

mula that makes a person give instinctive respect to gravity

so he wont be hurt.

They know that everybody who understands the for-

mula advances to a far better way of life.

Suppositional Reasoning

The use of suppositional reasoning is helpful because itenables a person to advance from known reality to prob-

abilities that might prove to constitute reality if carefully

tested for verification and consequent adoption. Anybody

who tests the results of suppositional reasoning as recorded

here is going to get many remarkable surprises.

Begin by considering the existing reality.

The existing reality is that a person keeps trying to gethis or her own way, that he or she attempts to satisfy urges,

and that in doing so each one frequently disregards reality.

It becomes clear that some plan of control is needed to re-

place urges with the intent to reason from reality before ra-

tionality can be introduced into the stream of human affairs.

Suppositional reasoning does not require that a person

believe what is said as preparation for understanding. Ob-

viously there is no need for beliefs in the pattern of think-

ing that is based on reality.

Contacting reality produces knowledge.

45


51/130

One basic tool of suppositional reasoning is the impli-

cation. If viewed with proper precautions, an implicationmay be used to disclose valid information that is not other-

wise available.

A person may be so eager to cross a street that he re-

sents a warning from a stranger who shouts, Stop! He

may form the false implication that he is being controlled

and disregard the correct implication that would make him

safe.

One form of reality is natural law. Natural law is an in-

arguable fact. Who argues against gravity? It simply exists.

As a part of creation, it is not subject to human whims. No-

body owns it, and nobody can alter it no matter how hard

he may try. Natural law in any other form is just as coer-

cive as gravity, the instant its reality is noticed.

That introduces the topic of coercive logic.

Many persons consider that term frightening. Theythink it warns of forced compliance. They call it irreligious

and unscientific. Actually it is merely a description of the

way reality works.

Does anything sensibly contradict reality?

Religion deals with realitys origin. Science deals with

its results. A religionist who understands coercive logic

calls it religious. A scientist who understands it calls it sci-entific. True coercive logic is a matter of reality, not belief.

The techniques of coercive logic differ from conventional

scientific method. Religionists and scientists should not ig-

nore behavioral realitywhere both can meet.

It is a principle of scientific method that findings are

presented in a way that permits duplication by other quali-

fied persons. That is also true of coercive logic. It providesa reliable methodology convincing to everybody who fol-

46


52/130

lows its logic. Bad reactions result from peoples judging it

to be disagreeable before they understand it.If they consider the information carefully enough, they

become aware that there is a simple and direct formula for

determining what is false and what is true in the field of

behavior.

The formula is so fundamental that it actually sets a

person free from the need to depend on truth as a basis of

reasoning. The formula is not to look from information to

how it may satisfy urges, but to look from information to

how it correlates with reality.

The Danger of Believing

People tend to accept information they like and reject

information they dislike. They do that more or less withlittle regard for its correctnessan unsound basis of rea-

soning.

It is commonly thought that a person should believe

what is true and reject what is false. But even that may lead

into a subtle kind of pitfall. People need coercive logic be-

cause of a deceptive quality about truth that enables truth

itself to mislead.If believed, truth provides an unsound basis of reason-

ing because truth must then be accepted on faithin which

case no attention is given reality.

When truth is unknown and is needed, people are

tempted to seek a substitute. But neither truth nor its substi-

tute is coercive in the sense that reality is coercive. Obvi-

ously the blind acceptance of supposed truth on someones

word that it is truth opens a person to unreliable influence.

Who decides what is truth or untruth?

47


53/130


54/130

In other areas people get confused. They often forget to

do important work, disregard the welfare of others and ar-rive late for appointments. That is because they fail to stay

in touch with reality. But whenever they are confused, di-

rect awareness of the appropriate reality ends that part of

the confusion.

If someone tells you that a mutual friend is dead, you

certainly do not go on believing he is dead after you see

him walking down the street. If you learn you are waiting

on the wrong corner for a bus, you certainly do not go on

waiting there after you see the bus stop at another corner.

Recognition of reality changes peoples minds.

Obviously a person does not persist in believing an un-

truth after he knows the truth. He does not learn the truth

by being told it; in that case, he can only balance one

statement against the other and then decide which to be-

lieveif either. Even if he changes his mind, he has only astatement to support his new belief, and he cannot actually

know whether that statement is correct until he checks the

reality.

The foregoing comments direct attention to the reality

that nobody really knows the truth when all he has is in-

formation from another person. That is enough to show the

risk of reasoning from truth. It shows what is meant by say-ing nobody is expected to believe what is said here. It also

shows how looking at reality makes a person independent

of human authority. It shows exactly why he should look to

reality for true understanding of human behavior.

Ordinarily people can depend on what is said by experts

in the fields of mathematics, chemistry and engineering;

but in the field of human behavior, people often depend onfalse information in a belief that it is correct. Because there

is so much trouble in a persons affairs, he cannot reasona-

49


55/130

bly hope to resolve it by reasoning merely from informa-

tion.He needs to reason from the reality it describes.

Reasoning from reality quite often contradicts a per-

sons urges. Allowing urges to control a decision keeps at-

tention off reality, and in that case, information may be

misunderstood. When it is a persons intent to look at real-

ity, he does. When he sees it, he is made independent of

the information. What is more significant, he also be-

comes independent of the person who gives him the in-

formation.

He becomes able to reason from the reality.

It comes as a surprise to most persons that, literally

speaking, nobody is really dependent on a supposed state-

ment of truth. If he believes it, he is depending on the per-

son who makes the statement. Usually it also comes as a

surprise that a person does not see the reality while he isdepending on the person who makes the statement of truth.

If a person tries to reason from truth, he is in danger of

reasoning from untruth. He cannot know whether it is truth

or untruth until he checks the reality. Then he reasons not

from truth nor untruth but from reality. That is what makes

him safe.

From this it is obvious that both truth and untruth re-quire reality to provide safety. Contacting the appropriate

reality is needed to establish the proof. Its validity is inde-

pendent of every person.

Reality puts an end to any urge it contradicts.

The Logic of Reality

Most persuasion arises because of urges based on peo-

ples conscious and unconscious motives to compete, show

50


56/130

authority, prove intelligence, establish supremacy and gain

advantages in a variety of other ways.Such persuasion requires use of personal force.

Personal force has only artificial authority, whereas real

authority is the force of coercive logic and is never the

logic of a person. It is the logic of reality. The best a person

can do is to direct attention to the realityand let it do the

work. That is enough to show the fault of ordinary persua-

sion.

The force of coercive logic is illustrated by what is

commonly known as the self-evident fact.

Strictly speaking, no fact can be self-evident. It is only

a concept described in a sentence or held in the mind. It

becomes what is known as self-evident when the reality

that it describes is observed.

The reality is what is coercive. Not the fact.

If a person tells you he is alive, you can see the evi-dence for yourself. But if you hear a voice saying the same

words, you could be hearing a recording of a person long

deceased. Only reference to the correct reality makes a fact

self-evident.

In addition, a fact properly described as self-evident,

cannot be proved. A person who demands proof shows he

is willing to deny the proof that is already evident. He alsoshows he is not reasoning from reality but from his own

urges.

If you tell someone that you are alive and he demands

proof, nothing is to be gained by providing it. He has al-

ready denied the proof he was shown and that any honest

person would have accepted.

Some people confuse themselves and others by sayingno one can prove his own existence. Perhaps not. But no

honest person demands proof after he is confronted with

51


57/130

obvious reality. Even in a court, where proof is cons

suppose we let civilization begin

Documents